Alex Don Leis
New member
I refuse to read your edit; even if i agree with it. Nope, not gonna happen.
What the fuck is this?
- Thread starter Alex Don Leis
- Start date
Happy Happy :)
New member
Yes they do have the right to burn the flag.
But there are TWO flags that you should be aware of. And although at first glance there SEEMS to be no difference, upon further inspection you will see that the flags are indeed quite different in function, representation, and lastly looks.
This can be flag A.
http://www.usflags.com/images/products/indoorus.gif
This can be flag 1.
http://www.usflags.com/images/products/Product-4456.jpg
Can you tell what the differences are?
But there are TWO flags that you should be aware of. And although at first glance there SEEMS to be no difference, upon further inspection you will see that the flags are indeed quite different in function, representation, and lastly looks.
This can be flag A.
http://www.usflags.com/images/products/indoorus.gif
This can be flag 1.
http://www.usflags.com/images/products/Product-4456.jpg
Can you tell what the differences are?
Not to insult DG or Tostig but I am the sort that would burn a flag as a sign of protest. I don't think flag-burning today would accomplish anything however. I will burn a flag however, the day Congress passes an amendment declaring flag burning an act of desecration of a national symbol and thus unconstitutional. I mean, it's stated in the handbook when your flag is too old and tattered and thus no longer serviceable, the proper action is to burn it. What will we do with the old flags, if to display them would be disrespectful?
I myself see both good and bad things when I look at the flag, and the ratio of good to bad that I see depends on how deeply I'm holding the government in contempt at the moment versus how much I love my country. Some days I'm all afire with patriotic fervor and other days I find myself looking at houses in Canada.
I suppose it all depends what was being protested. I could see burning a flag in protest of some laws or whatnot that you and others feel violates the Constitution, but not for something like protesting make-up companies use of animals or whale-hunting. I don't like either one of those, but they're not worth a flag-burning.
I myself see both good and bad things when I look at the flag, and the ratio of good to bad that I see depends on how deeply I'm holding the government in contempt at the moment versus how much I love my country. Some days I'm all afire with patriotic fervor and other days I find myself looking at houses in Canada.
I suppose it all depends what was being protested. I could see burning a flag in protest of some laws or whatnot that you and others feel violates the Constitution, but not for something like protesting make-up companies use of animals or whale-hunting. I don't like either one of those, but they're not worth a flag-burning.
Yeah, lets protest all the blood shed so we can live in an economically viable country. Lets protest the mothers who sent their sons off to war so we could have freedom. Lets protest the founding fathers of our country who stood against imperial rule on pain of torture and death and said FUCK YOU ENGLAND. Lets protest the fathers who left thier children to die in a war they did not believe in, but did it because they believed in their duty.
The flag is NOT a symbol of our government.
IT IS A SYMBOL OF OUR PEOPLE.
If you want to protest the government, then burn pictured of Bush.
But don't burn the flag my grandfather fought for. My uncles fought for. Don't burn the flag that has stood for hope of a better and free future for our children.
The flag is NOT a symbol of our government.
IT IS A SYMBOL OF OUR PEOPLE.
If you want to protest the government, then burn pictured of Bush.
But don't burn the flag my grandfather fought for. My uncles fought for. Don't burn the flag that has stood for hope of a better and free future for our children.
Flag burning is and needs to be legal. First the practical reason: when someone is mad at America, they can express their anger through different levels. To keep it simple, we'll use an arbitrary scale of 1 to 10 of damage inflicted on America. .001 would be telling another person you disapprove of America's policy on some issue. 8.5 would be another 911. (10 would be completely obliterating the country, landmass, population and an historical evidence of our existance). Flag burning (assuming you bought your own flag, and didn't steal it) would fall somewhere between driving around with a 'I support President Bush' bumper sticker and avoiding bathing for a week. All three of these things are prefectly legal, all three tend to piss people off and all three inflict a very minor amount of damage to our country. Being generous, flag burning would get a score of .01 (mainly because of the waste of tax dollars on the government's time spent talking about it).
To get a score greater than 1, you need to do something illegal. It must be against the law and actually hurt the country. The most minor offenses I know of are civil disobiediance that waste tax payer money by impeding the work of the government or flow of society requiring law enforcement to step in, but it doesn't hurt anyone or destroy anything. Like holding up traffic to protest something. I'm sure it carries a small fine. Let's say flag burning is banned and get the same penalty as people having such a protest. If I become pissed off enough to burn a flag and the penalty is just as bad as something bigger, I'm going to get my fine's worth and piss off as many people as I can. Now, if flag burners start getting treated like violent criminals or enemies of the state, then what incentive do malcontents have to stop at symbolism?
Enough about practicality, on to responsiblity. Think about what's on the mind of someone burning a flag. In my free time, I like playing video games and watching porn. I'm pretty sure the rest of the civilized world does as well. Someone has to be realy pissed off to step away from their XBox. If an American citizen is burning the flag of his own nation, the government's attention should not be on passing laws to silence their expression of disapproval. Instead, they should be addressing their failures to those people. Citizens pay the government's salary. The government is in place at the pleasure of the people. If a law abiding, tax paying voter has to resort to burning a flag to get attention, then not only has government done something wrong, but they're not listening either.
To get a score greater than 1, you need to do something illegal. It must be against the law and actually hurt the country. The most minor offenses I know of are civil disobiediance that waste tax payer money by impeding the work of the government or flow of society requiring law enforcement to step in, but it doesn't hurt anyone or destroy anything. Like holding up traffic to protest something. I'm sure it carries a small fine. Let's say flag burning is banned and get the same penalty as people having such a protest. If I become pissed off enough to burn a flag and the penalty is just as bad as something bigger, I'm going to get my fine's worth and piss off as many people as I can. Now, if flag burners start getting treated like violent criminals or enemies of the state, then what incentive do malcontents have to stop at symbolism?
Enough about practicality, on to responsiblity. Think about what's on the mind of someone burning a flag. In my free time, I like playing video games and watching porn. I'm pretty sure the rest of the civilized world does as well. Someone has to be realy pissed off to step away from their XBox. If an American citizen is burning the flag of his own nation, the government's attention should not be on passing laws to silence their expression of disapproval. Instead, they should be addressing their failures to those people. Citizens pay the government's salary. The government is in place at the pleasure of the people. If a law abiding, tax paying voter has to resort to burning a flag to get attention, then not only has government done something wrong, but they're not listening either.
Bonfire Night
After Queen Elizabeth I died in 1603, English Catholics who had been persecuted under her rule had hoped that her successor, James I, would be more tolerant of their religion. James I had, after all, had a Catholic mother. Unfortunately, James did not turn out to be more tolerant than Elizabeth and a number of young men, 13 to be exact, decided that violent action was the answer.
A small group took shape, under the leadership of Robert Catesby. Catesby felt that violent action was warranted. Indeed, the thing to do was to blow up the Houses of Parliament. In doing so, they would kill the King, maybe even the Prince of Wales, and the Members of Parliament who were making life difficult for the Catholics. Today these conspirators would be known as extremists, or terrorists.
To carry out their plan, the conspirators got hold of 36 barrels of gunpowder - and stored them in a cellar, just under the House of Lords.
But as the group worked on the plot, it became clear that innocent people would be hurt or killed in the attack, including some people who even fought for more rights for Catholics. Some of the plotters started having second thoughts. One of the group members even sent an anonymous letter warning his friend, Lord Monteagle, to stay away from the Parliament on November 5th. Was the letter real?
The warning letter reached the King, and the King's forces made plans to stop the conspirators.
Guy Fawkes, who was in the cellar of the parliament with the 36 barrels of gunpowder when the authorities stormed it in the early hours of November 5th, was caught, tortured and executed.
It's unclear if the conspirators would ever have been able to pull off their plan to blow up the Parliament even if they had not been betrayed. Some have suggested that the gunpowder itself was so old as to be useless. Since Guy Fawkes and the other conspirators got caught before trying to ignite the powder, we'll never know for certain.
Even for the period which was notoriously unstable, the Gunpowder Plot struck a very profound chord for the people of England. In fact, even today, the reigning monarch only enters the Parliament once a year, on what is called "the State Opening of Parliament". Prior to the Opening, and according to custom, the Yeomen of the Guard search the cellars of the Palace of Westminster. Nowadays, the Queen and Parliament still observe this tradition.
On the very night that the Gunpowder Plot was foiled, on November 5th, 1605, bonfires were set alight to celebrate the safety of the King. Since then, November 5th has become known as Bonfire Night. The event is commemorated every year with fireworks and burning effigies of Guy Fawkes on a bonfire.
Some of the English have been known to wonder, in a tongue in cheek kind of way, whether they are celebrating Fawkes' execution or honoring his attempt to do away with the government.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So, I'm thinking that instead of burning a country's flag in protest of current events or political decisions, we should either declare an annual event of effigy burning, or establish a store that sells flammable images of the topic being protested. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be classified under inciting a riot.
After Queen Elizabeth I died in 1603, English Catholics who had been persecuted under her rule had hoped that her successor, James I, would be more tolerant of their religion. James I had, after all, had a Catholic mother. Unfortunately, James did not turn out to be more tolerant than Elizabeth and a number of young men, 13 to be exact, decided that violent action was the answer.
A small group took shape, under the leadership of Robert Catesby. Catesby felt that violent action was warranted. Indeed, the thing to do was to blow up the Houses of Parliament. In doing so, they would kill the King, maybe even the Prince of Wales, and the Members of Parliament who were making life difficult for the Catholics. Today these conspirators would be known as extremists, or terrorists.
To carry out their plan, the conspirators got hold of 36 barrels of gunpowder - and stored them in a cellar, just under the House of Lords.
But as the group worked on the plot, it became clear that innocent people would be hurt or killed in the attack, including some people who even fought for more rights for Catholics. Some of the plotters started having second thoughts. One of the group members even sent an anonymous letter warning his friend, Lord Monteagle, to stay away from the Parliament on November 5th. Was the letter real?
The warning letter reached the King, and the King's forces made plans to stop the conspirators.
Guy Fawkes, who was in the cellar of the parliament with the 36 barrels of gunpowder when the authorities stormed it in the early hours of November 5th, was caught, tortured and executed.
It's unclear if the conspirators would ever have been able to pull off their plan to blow up the Parliament even if they had not been betrayed. Some have suggested that the gunpowder itself was so old as to be useless. Since Guy Fawkes and the other conspirators got caught before trying to ignite the powder, we'll never know for certain.
Even for the period which was notoriously unstable, the Gunpowder Plot struck a very profound chord for the people of England. In fact, even today, the reigning monarch only enters the Parliament once a year, on what is called "the State Opening of Parliament". Prior to the Opening, and according to custom, the Yeomen of the Guard search the cellars of the Palace of Westminster. Nowadays, the Queen and Parliament still observe this tradition.
On the very night that the Gunpowder Plot was foiled, on November 5th, 1605, bonfires were set alight to celebrate the safety of the King. Since then, November 5th has become known as Bonfire Night. The event is commemorated every year with fireworks and burning effigies of Guy Fawkes on a bonfire.
Some of the English have been known to wonder, in a tongue in cheek kind of way, whether they are celebrating Fawkes' execution or honoring his attempt to do away with the government.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So, I'm thinking that instead of burning a country's flag in protest of current events or political decisions, we should either declare an annual event of effigy burning, or establish a store that sells flammable images of the topic being protested. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be classified under inciting a riot.